The Bat (1926)

MAY 29, 2012

GENRE: THRILLER
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 4!!!)

Hey there, Tales Of Terror set! Long time no see (over two years!). I actually forgot that I never “finished” this box, and it was buried in my desk under some other stuff that I have no time for (such as my copy of “The Strain”, which I started reading two years ago, before the 2nd book was even released. The 3rd is probably in paperback by now). But I noticed it while digging around for something else, and noticed that it included The Bat, a movie I wasn’t really interested in before – however it was noted in that slasher book I mentioned yesterday as a film that partially influenced what we know as a slasher film, so I was intrigued.

Well, obviously it’s not REALLY a slasher by any stretch of the imagination. It’s closer to a typical “Old Dark House” movie than anything else, with hidden passageways, an impossibly large cast, and a plot involving money. What makes it a “proto-slasher” is that the villain is masked (as, you guessed it, a bat) and it’s a whodunit of sorts. The movie even begins with a disclaimer asking people not to reveal the Bat’s identity, and even though everyone involved with the film has to be dead by now, I will abide by their wishes. However, it’s not particularly exciting, and you can probably figure it out through process of elimination by the halfway point or so.

Anyway, it’s an enjoyable enough silent movie. You can’t expect much in terms of action or complicated plotting, but it moves along nicely and has some unexpected comedy. The film was based on a stage show, and I suspect these bits were retained from that incarnation, particularly the snappy comebacks of the maid character. I’m less sure about the casual racism, however – there’s a Japanese character who is suspected of everything and referred to as “The Jap” and even “Jappy”. Our great grandparents’ generation sure was made up of a lot of ignorant dipshits, eh?

I was also impressed by the production design; the rooms are huge, with ceilings seemingly 30-40 feet above the characters’ heads (with accompanying giant doors that look too big to open or close by yourself). There are also some fun staircase and passageway shots where the camera is far enough back to appreciate the design – it’s one of the more visually interesting silent films I’ve seen. The Bat FX are also fun, especially when there’s a light trick that HAS TO be what inspired the “Bat signal” in the later Batman comics (Batman was created 13 years after this movie’s release – check out this article about the many other “coincidences”, many of which I didn’t even pick up on).

Now, at the top of the review I mentioned not being interested in the film. It’s not because of the plot, it’s just that it’s a silent film. I didn’t know there was a way to “suck” at watching a particular type of film, but there is, because I completely suck at watching silent films. I never know when they’re going to have a title card with the line, or just assume we could tell from reading their lips (or just skip it because it wasn’t important). So there were several times where I was a bit fuzzy as to what was going on because I neglected to pay closer attention to their lips, assuming I could just read a title card that would never appear.

The film had a sequel, plus a remake starring Vincent Price. I’d love to check out both; Bob Kane apparently admitted that the sequel was an influence on his creation, and of course any movie with Price is worth a look. And they’re presumably less racist, so bonus!

What say you?

Tweet

PLEASE, GO ON...

Crimes At The Dark House (1940)

MAY 17, 2010

GENRE: BRITISH, THRILLER
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 4!!!)

Like a lot of the movies in these budget packs, Crimes At The Dark House can barely be considered a horror film by today’s standards. I guess back then, simply having a guy kill a few people made it a horror movie, whereas today it might be considered an adaptation of a particular episode of CSI: Miami. I will say though, I was surprised to see a murder occur so early on, and a somewhat disturbing one at that (a railroad spike through the head!). Obviously we don’t see the impact, but most of these things just have bloodless gunshots or maybe a strangling.

In fact one of the things I quite liked about the movie was that it wasted no time in getting going. The movie is about a murderous thief (Tod Slaughter) who impersonates the dude he killed in order to get his inheritance - and he’s accomplishes all of that in the first 4 minutes. I figured it would be like a half hour before they got around to that, but by that point in the movie, he had already offed another character or two and gotten married (in order to rob her as well). Our guy doesn’t dilly-dally.

Of course, his impulsiveness means that his plan is pretty much shit (which is why the body count is so high - he kills everyone that catches on, which is a lot of people). I don’t think a single part of his made up backstory went unquestioned, nor did he ever come up with a good lie on the spot to cover it up. Or he simply goes out on a limb with nothing, like when he tries to get his new wife to sign something that will screw her over. She asks to read it before signing, and at first he says that as a woman she wouldn’t understand any of it (smooth, though she more or less sees his point, hilariously enough), and then accuses her of not trusting him. See, when *I* am trying to get my wife to sign shit that will cause her financial ruin, I make stuff up and walk her through it, using a bunch of jargon and fancy lawyer talk to confuse/bore her to the point of getting her to sign it so I’ll shut up.

I got to thinking during the movie - time has really sort of killed the standard horror movie plots. Look how much trouble he had convincing people of his false identity THEN, without photo ID and Facebook and security cameras on every corner of every street. I cannot conceive of any logical way one could do the “pretend to be a dead/long lost man” story nowadays. And it’s just not this type of story - breakdown/survival type movies are becoming more contrived in order to get rid of the cell phones and other modern technologies that would prevent anything from happening (slashers have fallen prey to this as well), and we don’t need metaphorical giant bugs to deal with the horrors of war - we just need a cable hookup. And people in general are less care-free and adventurous these days - people just stick around home instead of going camping. I think we’re going to start seeing more period horror films, simply because it’s easier to put people in danger in the 1970s than it is nowadays. Who the hell can get lost when so many cars actually come equipped with GPS?

Back on point, the movie is based on Wilkie Collins’ (no relation, as far as you know) book The Woman In White, which was adapted a few times before and has been adapted several times since. From skimming the Wikipedia entry, it sounds a lot more dramatic than this film, which isn’t surprising since the book did not have Tod Slaughter playing the main character. I’m not too familiar with the guy; I only know that he’s usually a scenery-chewing ham, as he is here. Yelling “Curses” all the time, laughing maniacally, and sporting a big twirly mustache, he’s pretty delightful, and I can’t imagine a book version of the character having the same sort of energy, which was pretty much the main draw for me. Plus, I bet the book makes him sort of intelligent, which is no fun. If they were remaking this specific adaptation, they’d probably get Crispin Glover or maybe Johnny Depp (Slaughter actually performed "Sweeney Todd" on stage, so it would be fitting).

As with several Mill Creek transfers, the film is bizarrely off center, with a big black bar on the bottom (none at the top) and a line on the left that’s about three times the width of the one on the right. It’s also very washed out (though less “broken” than most transfers of films from this era - I only caught 2-3 skips). Apparently, my 40 cents doesn’t net me a quality transfer. But it’s also one of the last movies on the set I can qualify as horror, as most of the others that I haven’t watched yet are about gangsters and crooks and such. Mill Creek needs to assemble a new package for me! Chilling Classics II, perhaps?

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Devil's Partner (1962)

DECEMBER 9, 2009

GENRE: SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 4!!!)

At this point I would say there are JUST enough good movies on the Tales Of Terror set to make my purchase worthwhile. While its certainly had its share of stinkers and it’s getting harder and harder to find a film on it that sounds remotely interesting (or even eligible - many of them are under an hour long), there have been a few gems I would otherwise never have seen, such as Devil’s Partner, which is a fairly grim and well-written “sell your soul to the devil and then pay the consequences” movie from 1962.

The thing that works best about the movie is that it oddly feels a bit timeless. Sure there are things that might sound a bit funny (6 gallons of gas sets a guy back a whopping $2.30), but it’s not as broad as most horror films of the era were. The characters are largely believable and real (especially the heroine, the rare female character in a 50s/60s horror movie that exists beyond meeting/falling in love with the hero and being put in danger near the end), and they even have some wit about them that I don’t often see. At one point a cop asks our soul-selling protagonist why he doesn’t seem to be as uncomfortable in the heat as everyone else, and the guy replies “Well I’m actually from hell”, which of course the cop thinks is a joke.

I was also impressed by the makeup on the hero’s face. He gets mauled by a dog early on, and gets a big scar from his forehead, across his eye, and down to his cheekbone. The eye is almost completely exposed (sort of like Two-Face), which is pretty good for the pre-Savini/Smith years. I just wish they put a tad more effort into the production design for the devil worshipping scenes - the dude appears to be sacrificing stuff to an uneven, blank hexagon, instead of a pentagram with symbols and shit like that all over it.

Speaking of sacrifices, this is definitely not a favorite of PETA. While no animals are harmed onscreen, there’s an inordinate number of furry/scaly characters killed. In addition to the requisite sacrificing of a goat, a snake is shot and said mauling dog is bludgeoned. But very few humans die in the film to even it out. One dog is equal to what, 50 people? Yet there are only about 3 human deaths.

Only two issues really are with the very beginning and very end. The opening credits spoils what should be a surprise (that one actor plays two characters, one under heavy makeup so as not to be recognized), which is kind of a bummer as I probably wouldn’t have guessed it otherwise. Hopefully this movie will attract the attention of our nation’s illiterate. The other issue I had was that the ending was far too abrupt. Our guy is injured (he was the snake that got shot, then reverted back to human form - told ya, cool movie for back in the day). Then they just shoot him again a few minutes later without any sort of fight. Then scarred guy is miraculously healed, though it is unclear if the goat came back to life too as a result of this sort of spiritual “undo”.

But that middle? Good stuff. Not great, but for a movie I paid 40 cents for, I am pretty pleased. Also the main guy looked a bit like Oliver Reed when he got angry, so that was a plus.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

The She-Beast (1966)

AUGUST 5, 2009

GENRE: MONSTER
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 4!!!)

It’s been a while, but I’ve finally found another movie on the Tales Of Terror set that made it worth the purchase. All I ask for is four good movies on these things - which would translate to about 5 bucks per film - but such films have been difficult to find on this set, which is half poverty row 1930s/40s junk and half 60s fare like The She-Beast (Italian: La Sorella Di Satana), which is a delightfully humorous take on the standard “couple enters strange town and gets menaced” plot.

Right off the bat I was enjoying myself, because the couple is a wonderfully sarcastic couple of pricks. They snidely mock each other, the people they talk to, their surroundings... it’s like if Fletch found a soul mate and decided to take her to Transylvania (which is called Transylvania-Town here). And some of their humor actually works into the plot; after encountering a creepy old guy, she asks him if he knows Dracula. He of course has no idea what she means, but later on they meet Van Helsing ('s descendent, but come on), so her smartass comment sort of comes full circle.

Also the wife is played by Barbara Steele, in a rare non-ghost/witch role. I love this woman dearly, so to see her playing someone on my wavelength (i.e. a charming jerk) added immensely to my enjoyment of the film. It’s a shame she didn’t get more roles like this (or, if she did, it’s an even bigger shame I haven’t found them yet). Apparently, she could only film for a day, likely due to having to play dual roles in sixteen other movies that day, so she’s not in it a lot, but she makes an impression.

I also liked the relationship between Helsing and the film’s hero, Ian Ogilvy. It reminded me a bit of the Polanski/Jack MacGowran dynamic in Fearless Vampire Killers (which came out a year later), and while the hero gets most of the funny lines, Helsing works in a few as well. Hell, even the antagonists are kind of funny; at one point a cop is admonishing their Igor type guy, who is panicking about his situation (being in jail) and the cop tries to calm him down by assuring him that “For running over a chicken you won’t get more than 2 years!”

Only bummer was the ending, which is pretty abrupt and not very satisfying. We spend like 5 minutes with a trio of cops trying to fix their car, before our hero and Helsing just quickly drown the monster and everything turns out OK. I would have liked a bigger battle, or at least not so much time spent with people who didn’t really matter. Plus, the score here is straight out of a Benny Hill episode; the movie has humor, but it worked because it was in an otherwise straight up horror plot. If you’re going to resort to farce/slapstick, it severely diminishes the impact of the horror angle.

The cropping was awful; while a few other scope films on the set got some semblance of a letterbox transfer, She-Beast did not. Adding insult to injury, there’s a gray and black stripe running over the right side of the frame, resulting in even MORE picture loss (plus it's a B&W transfer when it's a color film). There’s a bit where Helsing is yelling at Ogilvy, and except for Helsing’s hand occasionally swinging in and out of the shot, you can’t see anything but a hallway. Apparently, Dark Sky has recently released a widescreen transfer (with a commentary by Steele!), I might have to pick that up.

Also on that commentary is producer Paul Maslansky. If his name sounds familiar, that’s because he produced all of the Police Academy movies, as well as similar films like Ski Patrol. It’s worth noting that I was far more amused by this than the bulk of his legit comedies. I won’t deny that it could have used some Michael Winslow though; the bad dubbing here resembles his Bruce Lee shtick anyway.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Sound Of Horror (1964)

JULY 8, 2009

GENRE: MONSTER
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 4!!!)

At this point, I have to believe that the Tales Of Terror box is not going to have as many gems like the Chilling Classics one did. Some have been pretty sweet (like The Vampires' Night Orgy), but for the most part, they are all dull and forgettable, like Sound Of Horror (Spanish: El Sonido De La Muerte). The movie only ended a few hours ago but I’ve already forgotten pretty much everything about it. And this was one of the (not many) films in the set that actually sounded (pun just realized) pretty fun, so I can’t imagine how lousy the ones I skipped over are going to be.

I mean, I’m sure I have seen worse monster movies, but like I’ve said before, sometimes outright bad is better than bland. At least stuff like Monster From A Prehistoric Planet has the cheesy effects and ridiculous dialogue to enjoy, but this is simply one of the most inert monster movies I can recall. All of our characters are the least pro-active in horror movie history; most of the film finds them simply hanging out in the house waiting for the monster to go away (or die of old age, perhaps). Christ, the 3rd act begins with all of them dozing in the living room. The only time they spring to action is when a character is in danger, as the others rush to help get their friend back safely doing nothing.

And the monster is invisible, so you don’t get a goofy costume to enjoy. Sure, this leads to some occasional funny effects (like when they throw weapons at it and they all “stick” haphazardly in mid-air), but it also makes some of the attacks confusing. At one point it starts whaling on a guy in a cave... or at least that’s what I THINK is happening. He’s just sort of flailing around like a jackass, and every now and then they cut to a closeup of a wound on his torso. But is it the monster causing the gashes, or all of the jagged rocks that he keeps brushing against as he spazzes out?

As for the titular “sound”, apparently, the sound of horror is that of a bird making the car alarm “whooooooooOOOOOOOOOOP” noise. Though to be fair, the sound design is pretty much all the movie has going for it. There’s a cool scene where the monster is trying to get in, and the camera pans 360 (well, a little over 180) degrees around the place as we hear it scratching and clawing on the outside, trying to find a weak spot. Good stuff.

But the PADDING! It’s among the worst I can recall. Early on there is a full 30 second establishing shot that doesn’t even seem to be where the next scene takes place. Whenever something happens (not often), we get a solo reaction shot of each character, accompanied by a musical sting. It also has history’s longest “car won’t start” scene; the guy tries it (no exaggeration) 15 times, as the other characters just sort of sit there. Then finally, one of the guys in the back of the car says “Try it again.” Yeah, good plan.

Now that I think of it, there ARE some choice lines of nonsensical dialogue to enjoy. The first line of the movie is “I’m scared of explosions”, followed by “You’ll get used to them.”. And the heroine has a touching moment of reflection where she announces that life shouldn’t be about treasure hunting (the film’s macguffin is a treasure), but instead about dancing. Yeah, why get rich when you can swing your arms around and pivot?

I’d say more, but I can’t. I’ve already forgotten it all. I’m sure I’ve seen worse monster movies, but none of their titles come to mind right now. But if you are in the mood for a Spanish horror film featuring an invisible monster, maybe three kills (two of them “for the team!” suicides), and a central location that may remind you of the one from The Killer Shrews (“But these walls are ADOBE!”) I hope you can do better than Sound Of Horror (and why doesn't this movie have a "The" in the title?).

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Night Of The Blood Beast (1958)

MAY 4, 2009

GENRE: ALIEN, MONSTER
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 4!!!)

I’m surprised Night Of The Blood Beast doesn’t seem to be more popular compared to some of Roger Corman’s other films of the era. It’s just as cheap and awkwardly paced as the rest, but it’s got some notable highlights. For starters, it seems to be actively ripping off Thing From Another World, only to briefly head into Day The Earth Stood Still's "Not all aliens are here to shoot us with spaceguns" territory at the end. I mean, all Corman films are knockoffs of something, but its rare that they are ripping off renowned classics.

Also, given Joe Dante’s love of Corman and horror films of the 50s and 60s, there is little doubt in my mind that “Gizmo’s Theme” was inspired by the score in this movie, which sounds to my (untrained) ear to be only a note or two different. Yet, both the Wikipedia and IMDb pages for the film are barren wastelands of non-information. Had the film not been lampooned on a 7th season episode of MST3k, it’s possible that it wouldn’t have any sort of cultural awareness at all.

As these things go, it’s not all that bad. Unlike the last couple of Corman entries, at least it’s squarely in the horror genre, as there is a monster, an isolated group of people, and a body count (well, two bodies. Still more than Swamp Women, I think). And the monster may move less gracefully than a GI Joe in the hands of a drunken 5 year old, but the design is kind of cool. Imagine the Metaluna Mutant crossed with a giant pile of mud and you’d be on the right track.

Some of the Corman cheapness is even kind of endearing. There’s a part where one of our two corpses is hanging from the ceiling. One of our heroes runs into the room and sees it, and yells “Wyman!” (the dead guy’s name. That, or a rather strange way of pronouncing “Why, man?”) before talking to the other hero. Then, not 20 seconds later, one of the heroines runs in, and the entire scene repeats, same camera angles and all. The call for help (I forget the actual dialogue, but it’s basically “This is the good guy group, rescue team that we never see, can you respond? Over.”) is also repeated some 5 or 6 times, and I swear it’s the same audio being used. There’s also a hilariously sad shot of a guy “putting out a fire”, and it’s painfully obvious that the fire damage (or a few PAs taking an ax and some paint thinner to a section of the wall) was caused hours ago.

I also loved the final “battle”. After the monster begins explaining why he’s there (he’s essentially proposing a symbiotic relationship between his race and Earth), our heroes toss a few molotovs at him and then shoot him with flare guns. Hilariously, rather than have a typical howl or “NOOOOOOOO!”, the monster keeps talking in the same tone of voice, which makes the heroes seem like a couple of assholes, if you ask me.

But I mean, Corman’s name is right there at the top of the film. Consider it a warning, or the largest font ever given to a disclaimer. You know what you’re in for, and you adjust your expectations accordingly. And on that level, I put this in the win column for the man.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Werewolf Of Washington (1973)

MARCH 2, 2009

GENRE: COMEDIC, WEREWOLF
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 4!!!)

If there’s one thing I never quite expect in one of my budget packs, it’s witty writing. Not that the movies are all “so bad it’s good” affairs like Cathy’s Curse, but they are all by and large rather generic filler (hence why they are available for forty cents a piece in a flimsy DVD boxed set). So I was surprised to find that The Werewolf Of Washington contained a healthy dose of wit and satirical writing. Being that it’s 37 years old, it obviously pales in comparison to what the Onion or Colbert come up with on a daily basis, but still, it beats the shit out of another inheritance scam movie.

The funny thing about the movie is how blatantly it rips off The Wolf Man setup, right down to the silver handled cane being used against a Gypsy guy. The twist is, our Larry Talbot standin (Dean Stockwell!) is convinced that the Gypsy (actually Hungarian, but for all intents and purposes it’s the same character) is a spy, so he asks his interpreter to “find out who she’s working for!” Then when the subject of pentagrams come up, he hears it as “Pentagon”. Heh. Once he gets back to Washington (actually Long Island) it’s more original, with lots of Watergate jokes (he's not supposed to be Nixon though, at least I don't think - they don't give him a name) and jabs at the President’s general cluelessness taking center stage.

What I dug about the movie was the general quirkiness of the whole thing. There’s a bald guy with sunglasses just standing in the background of several scenes (in one he keeps taking quick photos) but unless I missed it, he never talks, nor does anyone say what his job is. Then there’s a part where the president has to keep repeating “Chopper” over and over (and finishes with “Helichopper”). And then there’s this:

I mean, come on, the movie might have a lot of faults, but you can’t see a screenshot like that and still deny its intentional entertainment value.

One of those faults is the werewolf getup. Maybe they didn’t have enough money to tear the suit, or maybe it’s supposed to be a sight gag, but Stockwell simply looks like a guy wearing a werewolf mask. His nice suit never gets torn or even disheveled, making it hard to swallow. I don’t need a full blown transformation, but at least glue some hair on his chest and rip the shirt a little. Come on guys. Incidentally, the creepiest moment involving the werewolf is actually offscreen entirely. During the end credits, the President is giving a “My fellow Americans” speech, and he suddenly trails off, starts repeating himself, and then becomes a werewolf himself. It’s pretty awesome, and sets up a sequel that, far as I know, does not exist.

There’s also a scene in which two men engage in a rather tense scene in an in-home bowling alley. I can’t help but wonder if Paul Thomas Anderson watched the film before writing There Will Be Blood. I would like to think so. No one drinks a milk shake though, that was all PTA.

Like just about all of these movies, there is apparently no decent transfer available. Even on its own DVD, it’s a full frame VHS transfer, making the Tales of Terror version more enticing since you get 49 other movies with it for a few dollars more. But given the setup and occasionally (OK, usually) crude technical merits of the film, I would put this on the top of the “THIS should be remade” list. Surely you could modernize the film in every conceivable way: do a great Bush parody while delivering a decent werewolf movie at the same time. I know a few screenwriters/filmmakers read HMAD now - let’s write this bitch and live as kings! Also I’ll play the sunglasses guy.

What say you?

And now, Horror Movie A Day and Happy Hour Comics would like to present the 3rd in an ongoing series of HMAD-inspired comic strips. I hope you enjoy!! (Click to enlarge)

PLEASE, GO ON...

Terror-Creatures From The Grave (1965)

DECEMBER 30, 2008

GENRE: ITALIAN, SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 4!!!)

I kind of like the irony of Mill Creek providing widescreen transfers on a few of the films from the Tales of Terror set, because the whole idea of providing a widescreen image is to allow viewers to enjoy the film as intended. But I highly doubt that director Massimo Pupillo intended Terror Creatures From The Grave (Italian: 5 Tombe Per Un Medium) to be seen on what appears to be a VHS transfer of a camera shot bootleg, with sound that occasionally turns into underwater garbling noises and the occasional jarring splice. I swear there are actually two prints being used, because occasionally a splice will come and then the film will look better (or worse) then it did a second ago. But hey, A for effort and all that.

I should make a separate tagging for movies that I wish I could watch again on a decent transfer, because all the image/sound problems were really distracting from what is otherwise a pretty solid movie. It reminded me of some of the other 60s Italian films I’ve seen, such as The Ghost (which also starred Barbara Steele), but in a good way. I liked the mystery angle especially; I’ve seen so many of these horror movies in which the “monster” turns out to be just some guy that it’s now a nice surprise when there are legitimate supernatural elements behind it all.

Unfortunately, because of the attempts to keep this sort of a mystery, not a lot happens onscreen. We see a lot of people FINDING corpses, but not a lot of people BECOMING corpses. Luckily, the few we are offered are pretty fun, particularly a wheelchair bound guy. What is it about wheelchair-bound victims that make their deaths such a mean-spirited joy? I think of the old hag in Gremlins, and of course the death of Mark, patron saint of wheelchaired horror movie characters, in Friday the 13th part 2.

Also, because a lot of the movie is talk, there’s an issue that comes up a lot – dubbed dialogue overlapping. Because the English takes longer to say than the original Italian (I guess), we often have conversations in which people reply much quicker than they naturally should, because the pause in between one character’s line and another’s is wiped out by the longer dub track. It’s kind of funny to see someone “reply” so quickly to a question though.

One line might be a mistranslation, but either way it’s a gem. When delivering some exposition (the backstory involves the Plague, which was apparently enough to get Edgar Allen Poe a writing credit), a guy mentions “horribly severed heads”. As opposed to all of the wonderful and beautifully severed heads you are accustomed to?

Also, our hero looks like Joe Pesci from My Cousin Vinny. I’d screenshot it, but I already took the DVD out and it’s so blurry you probably wouldn’t be able to see the resemblance anyway.

So, yeah, if you can find a good copy, I’d recommend this one. It’s slow, but the payoff is pretty good, and it has all the hallmarks of the 1960’s Italian “horror movie in a castle” genre: crypts, inheritances, moors, and well, Barbara Steele.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Cabinet Of Dr. Caligari (1920)

DECEMBER 10, 2008

GENRE: CLASSIC, PSYCHOLOGICAL
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 4!!!)

Silent movies are not my friend. In addition to the obvious increase in how much time I spend on sleep-inducing reading, I also can’t get away with the “resting my eyes” approach, because there aren’t even sound effects or tone of voice to get the jist of a scene (though, come on, how long am I actually awake after my eyes first close?). And even when I’m wide awake, I can’t let my eyes wander, because I won’t “hear” the dialogue. So it should come as no surprise that despite its standing as one of the most important horror films of all time, The Cabinet Of Dr. Caligari was never high on my to-do list.

But it’s not just my sleepiness; I was also afraid that having already seen the past 90 years of horror movies that owe their existence (albeit in a Kevin Bacon-y way) to the film, I wouldn’t enjoy it all that much anyway. The ending has been long since spoiled, and the set design – the film’s most lasting contribution – would probably not be as impressive anymore. It’s one thing to try to watch an original when you’ve already seen the remake and try to undo your memories, but in this case, we’re talking about trying to forget EVERY HORROR MOVIE EVER in order to fully appreciate its contribution to the genre.

That said, I still enjoyed it. The sets may not be as “Wow!”-y anymore, but they ARE still impressive, and I would find myself paying more attention to the background than the foreground (i.e. the actors) every few minutes. I just wish half the movie wasn’t filmed in “Closed Iris O-Vision” so that I could actually see some of them in their entirety. And even though I knew the conclusion, the actual meat of the story was largely unknown to me (right down to the vocabulary – I had to look up “somnambulist”), so I remained engaged despite knowing that it was all in the guy’s imagination. And the scene where Cesare goes after the girl in her sleep is pretty goddamn creepy, if I do say so myself.

I also love the “Cesare” dummy that makes an appearance in the 3rd act, because I actually wasn’t sure if it was supposed to be a dummy or a corpse at first. Then a guy begins tossing it around the set, which pretty much gave me the answer. But hey, it’s a pretty good looking dummy!

I was also tickled to be reminded at how goddamn slow people used to read. A card reading “Case histories and notes” stays up for a good 10-15 seconds, which is more time than I need to individually say each letter in the phrase. But at least I could read that one; a few minutes later (or before, I forget. Same reel at any rate) there’s this:

There have been a few low-budget remakes and modernizations over the years, but no big Hollywood production. Given the film’s reputation for its impressive sets and twist ending, I find this kind of surprising. Surely the Saw guys could have some fun with the concept (say what you will about Repo – the set design, by the same team from Saw, is fucking amazing, which is even more impressive when you consider the film’s budget was lower than the last 2 Saw sequels). And the furor over such a proposed remake would be more entertaining than either film, so it’s win across the board!

I wish I could have loved the movie, but it’s just too hard to forget everything that has followed its lead. It’s a shame, but that’s just how it is. I still enjoyed it and would love to watch a special edition’s features (not to mention a better print than Mill Creek offered), however it won’t be dethroning anything on my top 10 list. Sorry, purists and “everything new sucks” types! I will say this though, to all readers who have recently had children – when they get old enough and want to join you for your horror movie watching, make them watch the classics first!

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Manos: The Hands Of Fate (1966)

DECEMBER 9, 2008

GENRE: CULT, SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 4!!!)

It’s a shame that MST3k went off the air during a horror drought, because it means that movies like Manos: The Hands Of Fate are considered the “worst they’ve ever done”. Call me crazy, but I’ve seen at least 2 movies in the past month that were far worse than this (including yesterday’s), and at least Manos has some valid excuses for its many, many shortcomings. And since these shitty movies are seemingly made for the ultra-cheap Lionsgate to buy for pennies, it’s pretty likely that many of them would end up on the show (MSTs producers had to pay for the movies they showed, which is why you’ve never heard of 90% of the episodes’ targets - they couldn't afford big time stinkers). With Mike and the other guys apparently only focusing on big blockbuster movies for their Rifftrax site (the “most recent Riffs” list on the site just looks like BoxOfficeMojo’s “all time” chart), movies like Manos will unfairly be known forever as the worst, while the Michael Feifers of the world go unpunished for their far worse movies.

Not that Manos needs to be defended, good Lord no. It’s slow, it’s seemingly edited by a blind fetus, it makes little sense, and its low budget shows at every corner (such as the rather slim number of folks doing the dubbing). But director Harold P. Warren has an excuse – he made the movie on a bet, and the money he pooled together wasn’t enough to use a camera with a sync sound system or actual actors. A movie like Leprechaun in the Hood has name actors and probably a reasonable budget – what’s its excuse for being just as terrible?

And to give credit where due, some of the dubbing is actually pretty good. Particularly the wives and the Master – it sounds/looks pretty reasonable on more than a couple occasions, even if it’s all the same two or three voices. I actually forgot it was entirely dubbed at times, so there’s something.

It’s the editing that kills this movie more than anything else. I guess it was already too short to lose anything, but come on – after the Master is killed (?) in the most abrupt finale in movie history, we watch yet another endless driving scene, drawing out the inevitable conclusion. Well, inevitable in that the Master is alive and our heroes are now under his control, not inevitable in that the little girl is apparently one of the Master’s many wives now. Ew. Then there’s when the cop asks “What couple?” and the answer comes about 20 seconds later. Delayed reactions, thy name is Hands: The Hands of Fate.

A very special cameo.

But my favorite “OK, you can cut now” moment has to be when Torgo ties the hero to a tree. It goes on for about two whole minutes, which is all the more hilarious when you realize that the camera could only film 32 seconds at a time, which means that Warren had to have instructed himself (as the hero, natch) and John Reynolds (Torgo) to stay put while the camera started up again, so he could continue showing this entirely unnecessary action. It goes so long that the score song actually ends, and another starts up before it finally cuts away a few seconds later.

Speaking of Reynolds, it’s sort of common knowledge that he committed suicide a few months after the film was released, but the reasons why are less clear. Many will say that it’s embarrassment over being in this film, but all we know for sure is that the device that he wore on his legs left him in tremendous pain, and he became depressed and addicted to painkillers as a result. So I’m sure that the suicide was caused by a mix of being depressed over being in so much pain, and also the closed time loop knowledge that his problems would be forever mocked by film fans who assume he ended his life because he was apparently the only guy to ever appear in a terrible movie. Rumors of some other cast member suicides are common, but they appear to be just that, though it’s understandably hard to get any concrete info on their whereabouts; almost no one involved with the film has a single other credit to their name. All I can say is: if starring in a really awful movie is enough to kill yourself, then the producers of Gossip Girl should keep a close eye on Leighton “Drive Thru” Meester.

The Mill Creek transfer is, unsurprisingly, terrible. It seems to have been taken from a dubbed VHS tape copy of a bad film print, resulting in any number of bizarre artifacts (note how the image keeps skipping/freezing, but the audio itself is uninterrupted). I am sure there is some sort of wise-ass-y “Worst Movie Ever Made Special Edition” DVD with a decent transfer (the MST3k version, which I’ve only seen part of due to the fact that I don’t care much for Joel, is noticeably cleaner), but I don’t need a bunch of assholes laughing at how terrible it is. I’ve said it a million times, or thirteen, and I’ll say it again: I’ll take ineptitude over soullessness any day of the week. And if Manos is legitimately the worst movie you’ve ever seen, well... consider yourself lucky.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Shock (1946)

NOVEMBER 13, 2008

GENRE: THRILLER
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 4!!!)

You really can’t go wrong with Vincent Price. Even a rather dull movie like Shock can manage to seem exciting when Price is onscreen. Honestly, whenever the movie shifts to other folks it nearly put me in a coma, but as soon as he was back on, it got my full attention. Shit, Willis can’t even do that sometimes.

And this was rather early in his horror/thriller career, so he’s not even as scene-chewingly delightful as usual. If anything, he’s sort of subdued, playing a shrink who kills his wife and then spends the rest of the movie trying to convince the one witness that she was hallucinating. It’s a grand role for him, and without doing any research whatsoever on the matter, I assume it was part of what led to his signature roles of the 50s.

It’s good that they cast him too, because other actors would not be able to strike the right balance between sinister and charming that Price pulls off, and in turn makes the movie interesting. You practically want to see the guy succeed (I almost put this in the “Hero Killer” category), because he’s just so damn wonderful. And I got a real kick out his nonsensical excuses and fake psychiatric practices that he explains to people. When the girl’s husband tells him that she is convinced she saw Price kill his wife, Price replies “Oh this is a common delusion of amnesiacs...” Hahaha, what? Why would someone who couldn’t remember who they were be able to “remember” specific murders that never occurred? Yet, not only does he convince the husband on this matter, Christ, he almost convinced ME.

Speaking of the murder, for some reason they never show his wife’s face. I expected this to be part of a twist or something, but no. The Code restrictions are obvious during the murder scenes, but why she is never fully shown I do not know. Maybe because he is later seen kissing his mistress (the murder is the result of them arguing about getting a divorce)? Was there some rule about only kissing a woman outside of wedlock if a wife character was never actually shown? Again, someone needs to do a doc about the damn Code.

Oh, and if you’re into conspiracy theories, Price begins a treatment that would kill the woman on Tuesday, September 11th. They even go out of their way to point this out, for some reason. Spoooooky.

As these 40s cheapies go, it’s not too bad, thanks to Price and a kinda cool plot. Plus the ending is a bit of a surprise, though not in a twist way, more in a redemption-y heroic kind of way. It’s very slow and absolutely nothing happens after the murder, but the fact that it’s not about a bunch of assholes in a house discussing an inheritance or whatever (which describes about every 3rd movie on the Horror Classics set) was enough for it to stick out a little.

What say you?

NOTE - Below is not the trailer, but a key (early) scene, provided by Mill Creek itself!

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Manster (1959)

NOVEMBER 11, 2008

GENRE: MAD SCIENTIST, MONSTER
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 4!!!)

You know, I had heard the title The Manster before, and just assumed it was made up, like as a gag in a movie that had a scene making fun of such movies. But nope, it’s an actual movie. And I own it.

(On a budget pack. It’s not like I went out of my way to place a movie called The Manster in my collection on purpose; even my ironic purchasing budget has a limit.)

However, it’s not the worst of its type. Its type, for the record, is a combination of Wolf Man (our guy even sounds and looks a bit like poor Larry Talbot, and his name is indeed Larry as well) and Dr Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. But, in the spirit of things, the movie Double Garden seemingly took a lot of inspiration from THIS movie, so I guess it evens out.

Like Garden, the movie takes place in Japan and features a really ridiculous monster. In this one, the “Manster” is just a guy with some half-assed Wolf Man makeup on, and a paper-mache head (or something to that effect) glued to his shoulder. Near the end of the movie, it splits apart and becomes its own thing (and is killed about 19 seconds later), but by then it was too late to really fear the goofy thing; especially since I spent the previous 70 minutes thinking about the (intentionally) goofy 2nd Zaphod head on the HG2G BBC series.

But it does the job. After a slow start it moves along nicely, and there’s even some occasional bloodshed. However, the one thing that particularly delighted me about this movie was the odd obsession with drinking. When some cops show up to the home of the monster-to-be, he angrily greets them with this peculiar phrase: “Come in you know where the drinks are!” He says it in the same manner one might say “Shut the door you’re letting the heat out!” or whatever. Later, he is being questioned, and the cop says “You remember when I saw you in a bar after that old voodoo priest was murdered?” As opposed to when he saw him in a Fuddruckers after an old voodoo priest was murdered? Are old voodoo priests being knocked off with alarming regularity in Japan?

Like Wolf Man, we feel bad for the monster, because he was unwittingly turned into one. But oddly enough, the mad scientist is kind of sympathetic too, because he also inadvertently turned his wife into a monster and is trying to save her. He euthanizes her at the end too, which is a bit of a rare occurrence, especially in 1950s movies. Another minor uniquity is that the cop still plans to arrest Larry at the end. Usually the monster guy dies entirely, or is OK and instantly forgiven for all that he did when under the monster’s hold. But that’s something that bugs me usually, because monster or not, HE is the one who killed a bunch of folks, and if I was a family member of a victim, I’d want the guy to at least pay a fine or do some community service. Kudos.

So, it’s dumb and derivative for the most part, but it’s the rare late-era 50s monster movie that still has some of the charm that made those movies so big in the first place. And for that alone, AND my feeling guilty over assuming its title was fake, I’ll give it a pass.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Teenage Zombies (1959)

OCTOBER 31, 2008

GENRE: MAD SCIENTIST
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 4!!!)

OK, you might notice that the movie is called Teenage Zombies and yet “zombie” isn’t listed as one of the genre tags. Now, I know that pre-Romero, zombie movies had an entirely different meaning, but even by those standards this isn’t a fucking zombie. There’s a mad scientist who has rounded up a few girls and given them some sort of mind control shit, but they don’t goddamn DO anything in the movie, so it doesn’t count.

So what DOES happen in this movie? Well, let’s see.... nothing. Nothing at all. Near the end of the movie there is a hilariously inept “fight” sequence in which three of our good guys begin rolling around with three of the bad guys, but it looks like a bunch of drunks playing Twister more than any sort of combat. The closest it gets to actually being violent is when our heroine (the term being used looser than a stool after a metric ton of Olean Cheez-its) suddenly runs over and strangles the mad scientist chick. It’s hilarious, because the other folks are already “fighting”, so it just looks like she’s jealous of the other actors and decides to have some fun for herself.

Making this scene even more inert is the fact that it, like the 60 minutes before, is filmed entirely in one or two shots. At one point we watch what seems like 30 unbroken seconds of the three mini-fights. Entire scenes will go by in one master shot, even when only one person speaks throughout the whole thing. Occasional (VERY occasional) close-ups seem jarringly out of place on the rare times they occur, and you get the impression that they are being used to hide edits than the result of any sort of creative decision. I think there are about 100 cuts in the entire movie.

So is there anything to enjoy in this thing? Well, if you have the Mill Creek version (why in god’s name would you have any other?), you might like to know that for what I think is the first time ever, a chapter break (between ch. 2 and 3) actually occurs in between scenes! Most of the time they fall right in the middle of a scene (hell, a chapter starting in the middle of a line of dialogue isn’t unheard of on these things), so it’s cool that the stars aligned for this terrible film.

The only other thing I enjoyed (for lack of a better word) is when the “hero” is telling the cops about how his friend disappeared while water skiing. “Where was he heading?” the cop asked, and the kid replies that they were just water skiing without any destination, as if this was a critical character flaw. As opposed to all of the folks who use water skiing as a primary mode of transportation to get somewhere? “They were going to the mall, sir!”

So that’s about it. DVD mastering coincidences and one mildly amusing line of dialogue provides the extent of this movie’s worth. Otherwise, if you simply must watch a 1950’s “bunch of kids take on a villain” movie, stick with the vastly superior (if hardly what I would call GOOD) Bloodlust. At least that has Mr. Brady and a bow and arrow death.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Devil's Messenger (1961)

OCTOBER 29, 2008

GENRE: ANTHOLOGY
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 4!!!)

It didn’t take too long for me to figure out that The Devil’s Messenger was not an anthology film by design, but something that was assembled. And sure enough, an IMDb research session revealed that the three stories were just episodes of a failed Twilight Zone wannabe called 13 Demon Street, and then they filmed a wraparound with Lon Chaney to package it as a movie. Nice try, er, whoever did that!

Since they are from TV episodes, you can guess that nothing fucking happens in the entire movie. No violence, no cool monster, no nudity... nothing. And it’s easy to see why the show failed; the stories (which I assume were the pick of the litter) all suck! One’s about a guy who finds a girl in the ice. He... really likes her! So he knocks out his buddy and thaws her, but she dies anyway. The end. Another one (which also has a guy knocking out his buddy for no real reason) was ripped off by Stephen King ("The Road Virus Travels North"), but his was a hell of a lot better. I can’t even tell what happened at the end of this one; the guy rips the photo in half, but then he dies. Or something.

The only one that was marginally entertaining was the third one. It’s a familiar story; a fortune teller tells a guy that he’s going to die at a specific time (midnight; which is convenient) and he tries to figure out how to prevent that. He doesn’t, of course, but seeing his attempts to do so were marginally amusing, and even though the twist end doesn’t make any sense at all, it’s kind of funny to me. Also, this one has one of the best lines ever: “You never used to drink before six!”. I myself never drink before 8:45 mountain time; this guy must be a real lush.

The best parts, naturally, are the wraparound segments with ol Larry Talbot. He’s supposed to be the devil I guess, and he’s having a grand old time. Unlike Karloff and Lugosi, I haven’t seen too many of these paycheck roles for Chaney, and it’s nice to see him in good spirits. The end of the movie is particularly great, as Chaney starts talking to “us” (that is, the presumed audience) and then nukes the entire world for some reason. We see that one house from the nuclear blast stock footage get blown apart for the 80 millionth time, and then the movie just ends. Kind of awesome. Why he decides to do this, I have no idea, but hey, points for originality.

Also, this was the most interesting-sounding of the Tales of Terror pack (not counting ones I’ve already seen anyway). If anyone else has this set, feel free to recommend a few, because I’m pretty disappointed with it thus far. Cabinet of Dr Caligari is on there, but I assume it’s a piss-poor transfer, so I’d rather get a traditional DVD for that one.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Phantom of Soho (1964)

SEPTEMBER 25, 2008

GENRE: SERIAL KILLER
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 4!!!)

One of my favorite movies since I started HMAD was Raw Meat (aka Death Line), a delightful British monster movie that featured Donald Pleasence in one of his best roles ever that didn’t once require him to talk about “it as if he were a human being” or something along those lines. Since then, I have sought a British film that would equal that film in terms of sheer bliss and dry humor, but unfortunately The Phantom Of Soho did not fit the bill.

Actually, it's a German movie, but it takes place in London, so I hoped it would be more like a British film (fun) than a German one (depressing). But it's not really funny (or depressing, for that matter). It's just sort of there, for the most part.

Not that it’s entirely humorless. I don’t think it’s possible for a movie with two London based detectives to not have any dry humor, just as it is impossible for me to write a review that didn’t have profanity. And it's clear that the Germans were obviously trying to emulate typical British humor, but something was apparently lost in the translation.

And translation is the best way to describe it, because it has been (poorly) dubbed. While a few lines here and there deliver, many of them just sound a bit awkward, due to the bored guy or gal dubbing in the lines. So unfortunately, you’re left with the actual plot, which is pretty ho-hum. Worse, the killer’s identity is painfully obvious from the start, which leaves all the investigation scenes feeling a bit useless.

That said, some of the kill scenes are pretty cool, with a surprising number of POV shots from the killer (so Halloween stole from Black Christmas, and Black Christmas stole from Phantom of Soho?). And despite the dubber’s best efforts, some of the humor shines through. There’s a great bit where the rookie inspector guy pulls out not one, not two, but three magnifying glasses from his jacket so he and the other two cops can inspect a photo. I know that doesn’t sound particularly funny, but trust me, it is. And even though I figured out the killer’s identity pretty early on, it was still a pretty interesting story, much better than most serial killer movies anyway (i.e. it has nothing to do with religious beliefs or being abused as a kid).

I was also happy to discover that this is the rare horror film with a title that begins Phantom of ____ and yet it is NOT a modern/alternate/whatever version of Phantom of the Opera. Once I read that the film revolved around a club in London called Zanzibar (where one would order his lady’s favorite dish, I presume), I assumed it would have a swinging disfigured killer hacking up dancers and cokeheads that threatened to undermine some mod chick he was particularly fond of, so discovering that it was more like a Jack the Ripper story by way of Agatha Christie was pretty sweet.

Mill Creek once again provided a widescreen transfer (though it’s a bit off, the left side is partially cut off while the right has a black spot), but it’s far from their best work. The picture seems to be recorded off of a fuzzy cable station, and for some reason, the sound has an echo. When someone speaks and there is silence after, you can hear the line again, sounding like it was coming from the next room. But I dunno, maybe the guy in the office next to mine is also a Mill Creek enthusiast and coincidentally happened to be watching the film today. Either or.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Vampires' Night Orgy (1973)

SEPTEMBER 8, 2008

GENRE: BREAKDOWN, VAMPIRE
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 4!!!)

Last week I pointed out that The Long Hair of Death was the first Mill Creek movie to be shown in its correct aspect ratio. But that was only like 1.85:1 (if that). The Vampire’s Night Orgy (Spanish: La Orgía Nocturna De Los Vampiros) does it one better though – a full on 2.35:1 transfer!!!* The annoying little Mill Creek bug in the corner of the screen didn’t even obscure any film information!

Oh, and the movie was pretty damn good to boot.

I think Orgy (which doesn’t have any orgies, sadly, though there is SOME nudity) is the first film to combine the typical “breakdown” scenario with a vampire film. Our group is in a big bus and it breaks down, so they stop in vampire town. The bus actually breaks down a 2nd time and they have to return, which is something I really liked. Dual breakdownage! I also love how the group immediately begins to drink once they arrive in the town and discover it empty.

It also sort of unfolds like a slasher movie, with our good guys constantly going off by themselves and getting killed every 10 minutes or so. Also, the vampires behave sort of like zombies; rather than just one euro-trash head vampire and a couple of lackeys, like usual, it’s just a bunch of vague, hungry zombies, a la 30 Days of Night (except for the Danny Huston character), which was also a nice change of pace. It’s only 79 minutes long, but it’s a well paced 79 minutes, and I could have easily enjoyed another 10-20.

In fact, that may be possible. One thing the film didn’t really deliver on was the gore. It never really felt edited (music cues were not abruptly cut) but for a 70s Italian horror movie, it was relatively dry in this area. I did some light research, and only found someone claiming their version was 82 minutes, but otherwise it seems that the film is complete (it has the nudity; apparently the nude scenes all have alternate “clothed” takes, so I don’t see why they would be OK with nudity but not gore). Still, some of the kills were pretty cool anyway; my favorite was when a guy is seduced by a vampire girl, who then tosses him out the window to be eaten by a bunch of vamps waiting below. Awesome.

The end is stolen from 2000 Maniacs, of all movies. Our two survivors go see a cop, and tell them about their ordeal. He doesn’t believe them, so they lead him to the town, only to discover nothing there. However, a final shot reveals that the town WAS there and they are hiding. At first I thought it was going to be like Nothing But Trouble, where the cop turns out to be in on it, but oh well, can’t have everything.

Another thing worth noting – even though the film is obviously Spanish (even the credits are in Spanish – “Producida por”!), the dubbing is way above average. Some of it sounds a bit forced (as if they were pausing unnaturally to better match the original lip movement) but as a result, there isn’t any of the usual sort of “the guy is still talking but his mouth is already closed” action.

It’s rare I see a film on these MC sets that I would actually recommend for non ironic reasons; I’d even go out and buy the film on its own DVD if the image was better (widescreen or not, it’s still a bit washed out, as always) and had some good extras. I may tell everyone to watch Cathy’s Curse (the reigning champ of budget pack “finds”) but it’s a wretched movie. This one’s actually pretty damn good for real. Check it out.

Also, this is my 3rd movie in a row in which the monster type (Devil, Zombie, and now Vampire) was in the title. Cool. If possible, I’ll keep the streak going.

What say you?

*Someone on IMDB claimed that the transfer was in fact a full frame transfer that was then masked (black placed over the image) to only appear widescreen. This is completely stupid, as it would mean you were only watching the very center of the image (as it would be missing the left and right sides from the initial cropping, and then the top and the bottom from the masking). I think something like that would be noticeable, and thus an example is below:

ORIGINAL WIDESCREEN IMAGE...

...THEN CROPPED...

...AND FINALLY MASKED AGAIN?

No. Idiot.

PLEASE, GO ON...

Night Fright (1967)

SEPTEMBER 5, 2008

GENRE: MONSTER
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 4!!!)

Sometimes, you just need to watch a bad monster movie from the 60s. There’s nothing particularly good about Night Fright; it’s slow, badly photographed, padded beyond any reasonable measure... yet that’s all part of the charm of the damn thing. Had it actually been good, it would probably bore me, because I would have seen all of the movies that had ripped it off in the 40 years or so following its release. Instead, it works as a relic of a time long since past: when all you needed for a monster movie was any sort of suit, a down on his luck actor (in this case, John Agar), and a few bland kids.

The bland kids spend roughly half the movie dancing around in the dark (it seems shooting day for night wasn’t an option for director James A. Sullivan). One girl’s ass in particular appears in the film more than the monster ever does. Of course, there is some inner-group turmoil (two guys fighting over the same girl), leading to some great dialogue like “This is our private blast! If you don’t dig it, split!” and more badly photographed action, plus some cops wandering around, people making phone calls... just about anything Sullivan and writer Russ Marker could think of to avoid having the damn monster appear. Again though, this is what made it fun to watch. It also kind of reminded me of Giant Gila Monster at times, except Sullivan and Marker failed to devote any significant amount of screen time to the finer details of car repair.

There’s also some strange editing going on, like the fact that the opening credits don’t appear until the movie is about 10 or 11 minutes into the narrative. There’s also a great bit when a guy is talking about himself (providing “characterization”) and he says “Sometimes when I’m alone I-“ and then the film cuts to something else. But it’s not the usual Mill Creek “Oh we used a film print we found in the garbage” type of bad splice edit, it seems completely intentional. The editor simply realized no one gave a shit about what the guy did when he was alone and tried to get the film to move along. Of course, had it cut to the monster or something, it would work, but it just cuts to other people doing not much of anything. Sullivan must have been a protégé of the Night Fright’s editor (Arthur Sullivan – relation to James unknown but pretty goddamn likely), since he went on to edit the incomprehensible Manos.

As for the monster, I’m not sure. If there’s ever a shot in the movie where he could be seen clearly, I missed it. Here is one of the better shots:

But most just look like this:

Yeah, I don’t know where he is in there either. I could hear him growling so I assume he is in the scene, but it might have just been Agar muttering to himself.

One thing I loved is the end credits. Not because it was finally over, but because they are picture credits, accompanied by some rousing Bonanza style score. I always liked those, and it’s a shame so few films use them anymore (I think the Scream films are the most prominent “recent” example). They also follow one of the silliest closing lines in movie history – “I’ll buy you all of the uniforms you want!”

This one never showed up on MST3k to the best of my knowledge, which is kind of strange. It’s the perfect type of movie for them, and a good length too (75 minutes). Plus they always had fun with Agar’s films, even some pretty decent ones like Revenge of the Creature. A missed opportunity, to be sure.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...